Fallout 3 - Games for 2008 @ RPS

A Fallout licence gives you… what? A post-apocalyptic world. Make your own up and save yourself the hassle of dealing with friends who hate you and strangers who look just at you strangely.
So why do it?

Well, three reasons come to mind.
Firstly, I could just be wrong and Fallout is a much bigger deal than I thought and that little Pip-Boy is a key to a world of infinite money. I don’t think so.
Secondly, Bethesda may be as dirty fanboys as the NMA guys. It may just be as simple as plain lust for Fallout, the plain desire to write a sequel to a game they think is brilliant. This sort of things strikes even the brightest creative minds - look over at Comics, where there’s a strata of some of the medium’s brightest minds whose most heartfelt desire is to have a shot at Superman. They’re insane, and if they had any sense they’d be doing their own thing… but that they don’t have that sense means that it’s done as an act of devotion. This is actually a good reason to give a damn about Fallout 3. People working on something that’s genuinely invested in, on average, leads to better work.

I've asked myself the same question many times since Bethesda bought the Fallout lisence. It just doesn't make any sense - compared to Bethesdas' current fanbase, the Fallout fanbase is vastly outnumbered.

Could they actually be trying to make a true sequel to Fallout 2, as the author suggests? It's definetly a possibility, and the main reason why I still keep paying attention to Fallout 3 news.

I don't doubt they are fans. But I also think that has nothing to do with it - the guys who sign the cheques aren't likely to prioritise that over the return they believe they can get. So, they believe FO is a better investment than creating their own new IP for some reason(s).

I would disagree, but I think that won't do any good. I thought the quests were pretty good, actually. Especially in the expansion. Linear, maybe. I guess that's most people's problem with them. *shrugs*

I think they just took advantage of their success. They wanted another franchise for their growing company and Fallout was well-liked and available. I thought the idea was to have two franchises and then they could crank out a new game every couple years, alternating between TES and Fallout. They're big enough now to hold to that, give or take 6 months. Oblivion was when? May 2006? Can't remember that far back

I don't understand why people think Bethsoft would be better if had they made their own.

How many Post-Apoc franchises can people name at the top of their head?

You know what's drilled into the head of every student that takes a marketing class? Word of Mouth is the best form of advertising.

The only gamble that Beth has taken is whether the inevitable negative backlash would hurt sales instead of help them. Considering the 100 previews of the thing wondering why they are doing it this way I think its a sound investment.

Their own franchise would not nearly get the Word of Mouth that FO3 is getting. Its Bioware that's going it alone based on their corporate name. Would a Baldur's Gate 3 already be made and selling bajillions instead of us waiting for Dragon Age?

I know a number of people on my old server and at my job already lined up to buy the thing thinking its the next best thing since Bioshock and Halo 3.

I've set them straight of course but they have enough money not to bother listening to me.

The only thing that's going to kill this thing is if its completely unfun and has a ton of bugs.

Originally Posted by Thaurin
Especially in the expansion. Linear, maybe

Ahh, that maybe true, honestly I am really only getting to the point where I could play some of the expansions. However I am referring to the many quests like the Fighter Guild, take the Hyst Sap mission for example, I just referred to in the Dev Manipulation thread.

As you bring up maybe it's an individual perception and if your happy with them thats fine. Maybe I am being unfair in thinking others thought they were shallow, choice less and manipulated.

Originally Posted by Maylander
Truth be told, the Dark Brotherhood questline is very good, however it lacks certain choices along the way to make it exceptional.

True, it certainly seemed much better written and acted than most. Like you, I too missed a choice here and the end just fell apart and wasn't believable at least to me.

Spoiler

Killing the highest leader with out an order from the Lady or certainly any one that participated at that house, all they had to do was ask the Lady what to do or what was happening, but they acted on their own which is completely opposite of everyones behavior (at least I saw) as the quest unfolded.

Originally Posted by crpgnut
They wanted another franchise for their growing company and Fallout was well-liked and available

True, brand name recognition and world canon had to be a big part and like the article hinted at most of bethesda's canon seems to come from being forced instead of fully fleshed out.

Originally Posted by Lucky Day
The only thing that's going to kill this thing is if its completely unfun and has a ton of bugs.

Right, they certainly have an advantage. I thought most of the quests in oblivion were average, with absolutely no real choice, yet many are happy with this formula, I wish it wasn't true but I certainly can do anything about it. So if they can manage the *bethesda average*, sadly they win.

-- Trust me, most of the names I have been called you can't translate in any language…they're not even real words as much as a succession of violent images.

Originally Posted by Acleacius
Ahh, that maybe true, honestly I am really only getting to the point where I could play some of the expansions. However I am referring to the many quests like the Fighter Guild, take the Hyst Sap mission for example, I just referred to in the Dev Manipulation thread.

As you bring up maybe it's an individual perception and if your happy with them thats fine. Maybe I am being unfair in thinking others thought they were shallow, choice less and manipulated.

I think different people expect different things from these things. Most of these quests don't have any significant choice in them, only exploration and combat. But some are pretty imaginative, in my opinion. Like the living painting quest, or the invisible town quest. You just play the game and run into something like this and go, hey. That's cool. There is tons of that stuff in Oblivion. Oblivion's world may seem empty, but I can still go out and find cool things in there.

But meaningful choice and moral dilemmas? Look somewhere else, I guess. Shallow it may be, but shallow may be sufficient. It's not boring, anyway. Well, in my opinion, that is. (Dungeon crawls do get repetitive a bit.)

I thought most of the quests in oblivion were average, with absolutely no real choice, yet many are happy with this formula, I wish it wasn't true but I certainly can do anything about it.

Well, maybe it's because I really like adventure games as well. Those are definitely very linear in nature and don't offer much (if any) choice. But good writing, atmosphere, characters, dialogue and exploration means good fun.

It was my impression that the quests in Oblivion were actually well written and imaginative, much more so than in previous TES games, and more so than in many other RPG's. However at the same time they were poorly designed (offering no real choices), poorly embedded (linear quest sequences in guilds, no effect of quests beyond immediate reward, little embedding in the rich TES lore), and further hurt by higher level design decisions (quest pop-ups, quest arrow, sameness of regions and dungeons, level scaling). that severly blunted the effect they could have had.

BTW, I hate the quest arrow and mark the map mechanics in The Witcher too, as it is likewise sometimes used highly illogically.

Originally Posted by Thaurin
Most of these quests don't have any significant choice in them, only exploration and combat.

Well, maybe it's because I really like adventure games as well.

Very true and I couldn't have said it better myself, I have never really complained about their combat and certainly about their exploration. The action parts and exploration are the very best parts and are very good. I could mostly only nitpick the combat, it could be better but it's certainly not the magnitude of the quests and horrible voice acting (except from the 3 main stars of the main quest) and horrible GUI for PC, to name only a few.

Originally Posted by GhanBuriGhan
It was my impression that the quests in Oblivion were actually well written and imaginative, much more so than in previous TES games, and more so than in many other RPG's

I can actually see and agree with that myself it's just the negatives make it hard to appreciate the positives sometime, especially when the developer intentionally mislead (lie or whatever).

-- Trust me, most of the names I have been called you can't translate in any language…they're not even real words as much as a succession of violent images.

Originally Posted by Acleacius
I have never really complained about their combat and certainly about their exploration. The action parts and exploration are the very best parts and are very good.

And yet, there are many who complain about that in turn. Everybody has their own gripes with everything. The main thing is to not take your games too seriously, I would think. Actually, most things in life should not be taken too seriously, I'd say.

horrible voice acting (except from the 3 main stars of the main quest) and horrible GUI for PC, to name only a few.

Apart from a few mess-ups where the wrong voice-actor speaks a line for a background NPC (it happens to the best), it wasn't that horrible. I've heard much worse and I didn't really care. Listen to some of the '96-'98 releases (or even further back in the adventure genre) and whimper. It still adds a new dimension to the characters, even if they sound flat or uninspired.

The UI sucks on Xbox 360, too, in my opinion. I keep getting lost in it just like I did on the PC! It's just layered too deep, or something! There's no way to quickly and intuitively navigate to where you need to be. So maybe it's not simply a console issue after all.

The problem is bethesda called it a RPG and have a huge long list of broken promises

Developers "lie" all the time, though. It's not always intentional, either. Sometimes, planned features just have to be cut. Sometimes something has to be redesigned altogether. It's a multi-year project, after all.

I think Fallout 3 is a no-brainer for Bethesda, whether they're fans or not. Some of this has already been touched on, but here's how I see it.

Most of all it's convenient, because Fallout's is a dead world. That makes it much easier to authenticate (oh, and if I read the word "verisimilitude" one more time, I think I'll vomit) in a way that fits the Oblivion engine. It's a better fit, actually, because graphics will be emphasized more and NPCs less.

The Fallout brand is guaranteed to get attention. It already has. From their point of view, the folks over at NMA and The Codex are sort of working for Bethesda by helping focus attention on Fallout 3.

Then there's the combat system, and Bethesda earns big points for this in my book. They obviously put a lot of effort into creating an outstanding one for Oblivion but fell short. This is an opportunity to try again and get it right.

-- Oh, I wish I had a river I could skate away on. But it don't snow here. It stays pretty green. I'm going to make a lot of money, then I'm going to quit this crazy scene. -- [Joni Mitchell]